"To keep the review thread clean..."

[WickedEve]

or C. - she takes it as a compliment.

it was a joke.

i suspect you may have had too many ants in your pants over the whole thing to recognize the humor. that happens sometimes, when a person gets riled up over small potatoes.

Thanks, Pat.

 

[KOLKORE]

You are right!

Thanks for the mention o my poem leBroz.

Kolklore, first, don't take this the wrong way, I have absolutely no problem with someone harshly criticizing any of my poems but I was somewhat bemused by your comment as there was no criticism of the poem it self and I can see there is plenty to criticize about it, you criticized the subject and my take on the subject. However, I'm not going to defend the structure and poetic value of the poem, as I said, I can see it is flawed and defending my poems doen't provoke enough energy in me to care but let me answer your comment which is...

It is with a lot of respect that I disagree with you LeBroz. BTW, anything wrong with allowing everyone reading your positive review of the poem? Why not post it here as well?
Back to the poem. I got it I got it. It's this that and the other from our beloved Seinfeld. Only there it was about Ellaine and Seinfeld intimate relationships, not about Democracy. I was actually saddened to read that this is how you see it. In my naivite I thought it's all about people going out participating asking about what bother them about what they know bugging the politicians. Seeing it the way you do it's all about some dellusional meeting some morons. No wonder no one votes at the end. I wonder which political rally have you actually attended which inspired you to write this poem. The way I read it most people are quite heated up on what bugs them and know how to say it. Are you sure it was in this country?

The first little paragraph speaks for itself so let me go back to your comments, though in many ways I know it is futile as people bring their own meaning and experience to a poem.

I don't know who Seinfield and his side kick Ellaine is. I'm making the assumption they are TV characters. When you say am I sure it is about 'this country' I assume you mean America. The British government was in my mind but I'm sure it does apply to America as well as other democracies from my own personal observations. Certainly since both countries are in a war based on duplicity and lies with significant amounts of each population supporting the war for different reasdons than what each government said they were fighting it for. The US administration appears to be the same as the British government here, changing the reasons why we are at war after the fact to defend their own immoral position and significant amounts of each population appear to be willing to swing behind their leadership even if they said the war was fought in defense of Micky Mouse. Having taken an active interest in debates (though there is largely a lack of them due to each government having morally bankrupt positions), the quality of their defense of the war by both governments and the lack of guts in attacking the war by oppositions when opposition would have meant something, does lead me to believe both countries are governed by morons. Worse still, both governments got voted in for a second term which leads me to believe there are substantial amount of people in both countries happy with the immoral policy set in motion by the said bunch of morons. However, being politically partizan in a poem is futile, which is why I wrote the poem like I did. Though in reality I guess I'm not partizan, both governments and their oppositions appear clueless, moronic, dangerously imbecilic and don't have a public that hold them to account.

They are my views which I suppose influenced my writing of the poem, that said, it in no way makes the poem a good poem, the poem lives and dies by the value and quality put upon it by the reader and as I have said, I can see flaws in it but sometimes a poem needs flaws to hit harder. Maybe not this one, I don't know, polemic is always difficult to judge and I so think it needs some serious editing.

Your comment is appreciated Kolklore, I hope you don't see this in anyway as a personal attack, it isn't and I don't want it to be taken as such. Judging by reader response, the consensus is that the poem is not up to much. Hmmm, maybe they just don't like the polemic.


EDIT The first two lines should be enough for Brits to understand who I was talking about.

The lunatics sit on green leather
the senile sit on red.

The Members of Parliament sit on green leather benches and they are for the most part lunatics. The Lords sit on red leather and they are for the most part senile.

Thanks for responding!

I Actually don't mind ploemic -as long as it's done respectfully.

What can I say? you got me. I demostrated a bad case of cultural myopia when I assumed the poem was done based on the American political arena. I will be more cautios, and I appologize.
Beyond this critical mistake though, we do have some disagreements which are based on substance. I would not call it a harsh criticism though.
First, I do not subscribe to the common belef that the subject matter and the form of an art work are two different worlds with a walll between them. To me this belief is a political statement in and of itself both in a capital P as in the politics in the country/world at the time and in a small p (I forgot the term) as in the politics of within the art.

But setting this issue aside, We also differ about the assessment of what's actually going on - politically speaking. And I speak more assertivly on the situation in the USA than about the same in the UK. I can see how - having what I title as quite a cinical or disillusioned view of both the public and the system you would write what you have. In the US (and IMO also in the UK and in Europe there is a ground swell against the politics of lying and deceipt (we agree on that). How come people COULD have been lied and manipulated for that long that is another valid question which could take some more space to discuss...

 

[unpredictablebijou]

kolkore, I've appreciated your willingness to interact and comment before - it's always nice to see people who are willing to really think about the work here. What i'm seeing in this discussion is a question of poetry being considered for its content, rather than its form and style and creativity and those sorts of things, just like in the political poem discussion earlier.

While i believe a poet does of course have a content, an idea in mind, and it is certainly a reader's right to think about that content and whether or not they agree with it or are appealed to by it, i think a reviewer's job is different from a reader's job. A reviewer is more concerned with questions like, "did this poet say what he or she wanted to say effectively?" rather than "do I like what this poet had to say?" In fact, a reviewer who spent too much time on the latter question wouldn't be a fair reviewer. For example, what if a reviewer didn't like the idea of extramarital sex? You'd get reviews that dismissed even the best poetry about sex outside marriage just because of a moral issue. That may, to a certain extent, be within the rights of a reader, but a reviewer just can't do that. It wouldn't be fair to good poets who wrote about controversial things.

As to "hate speech" on boards like this, that's a very, very tricky area. First, there are some differences between something like a racial epithet in a story or poem and someone getting on one of the forums and spewing racial slurs. (It doesn't happen much here in the poetry area, but I find racist and sexist sentiments all over the place in the AH and other spaces). In a poem or story, one must not assume that the author thinks what the characters think. I might write a poem about a racist bastard simply to point out that there are racist bastards in the world and make people consider their feelings about that. But that doesn't make me a racist bastard.

If I get on a forum and spew racist ideas, I hope that Laurel and Manu wouldn't even have to be bothered to step in - this community would jump on that, and decide either to ignore me or argue with me. Again, that's not hypothetical; I have seen that very phenomenon here regularly. Not HERE, in the poetry area (I think we're all too old and fat to be really objectionable to anyone) but here on Lit. Ostensibly, communities like this are about free speech, so people have a right to be racist pigs, but the community also has a right to respond to that however it chooses to.

One of the things poets do is explore the impact of words on an audience. Now, I haven't read the poem in question but I'm going to assume, just for argument, that it's A) really sexist and hateful to women and B) a reasonably "good" poem in the sense that it uses language differently and creatively and says what it intends to say effectively. A reviewer might go so far as to say, okay this piece made me feel icky and I really don't like the person who wrote it. But a reviewer's job is to evaluate on the level of skill, creativity, innovation, stuff like that. Not on content, at least not much. A good reviewer moves beyond personal responses, because it's his or her job to try to tell readers about poems that have a certain quality, regardless of politics or philosophy.

I might suggest (I believe someone pointed this out earlier too) that one thing about "good art" is that it forces people to respond, gets an audience involved. That's not the only criterion for good art but it is an important one. I often say, well, just because I wouldn't want to sit and look at a Kandinsky painting all day doesn't mean he was a bad artist. Picasso's Guernica was angry, strong and offensive to a lot of people, but frankly, that was one of the things that made it good art: it forced a response from the audience. When Courbet painted "L'origine du Monde", ('the origin of the world') which is simply a woman's hips and open genitalia, people found it "obscene" and offensive. When I look at it, especially given the title he gave it, I see something sacred and phenomenally beautiful, treated in a very reverent way. But a reviewer has to look at that (and the reviewers at the time failed this task miserably) and say, does it say what it intended to say? is it a "good painting?" Simplistically, how's his brushwork, his color, his choice of frame? If he had titled it something else, like "Dogs at sunset", it wouldn't be as successful in making a statement about something he believed. That sort of evaluation is within the rights of a reviewer. A reviewer ideally does not say, "I am a gay man who thinks female genitalia is disgusting and therefore this is a Bad Painting."

It's tricky business, this reviewing. You won't see me volunteering to do that job; i don't envy the task. But you, as an audience, have the right to go further than a reviewer, to look at content. Still, content doesn't designate "good" and "bad" art as such. What it determines is the "like" and "don't like" aspects of your response, which are a different set of judgments.

As to the whole question of "whore" and other sexist language, I think you'll find that many of the women here explore those very terms both personally and as writers, because of the strong impact they have. That word particularly is one that I have personally tried to reclaim, much the way the gay community has tried to reclaim the words "queer" and "dyke" and so on. I consider myself a sacred whore, an ethical slut, and that's partly because those terms were so volatile to begin with - they really get misused to apply to women who enjoy sex, or to women who choose to have more than one sex partner. Those of us who fit those categories claim the term in order to re-define those words as positive, and in fact to point up the idea that enjoying sex and having multiple partners is not a bad thing.

again, thanks for being involved enough with the work to form opinions. it makes writers feel like they're actually doing something important.

bijou

 

[KOLKORE]

or C. - she takes it as a compliment.

it was a joke.

i suspect you may have had too many ants in your pants over the whole thing to recognize the humor. that happens sometimes, when a person gets riled up over small potatoes.





other than your own, you mean.




it was a poem. how do you presume advocacy?

try saying this: "This Is The Internet."

lather, rinse, repeat.

What is a poem? Boy you are clueless. Its the ultimate advocacy. What do you take as a poem? Some empty calorie sugar bar to be consumed and disappear? It exists in a social context where women can be called whores and it's a joke(for you). Why won't you publiclly ask if it's a joke brave man? Poems consist of words which can hurt. People express feelings opinions prejudices with poems. sometimes they call for revolutions.

You maybe the guru of the image you have of the internet. So far it has not been defined by one person - happily not by you.

Hate speech will never be at any forum: "Small potatoes" including your personal attack.

Boy, you are mean with your: "little potatoes" and "ants in my pants" I guess you were describing youself.

 

[Tathagata]

fight at recess...pass it on

 

[unpredictablebijou]

fight at recess...pass it on

*snerk*

can I join in? been taking beatings all week and I just haven't had enough yet.

 

[Tathagata]

*snerk*

can I join in? been taking beatings all week and I just haven't had enough yet.

please sir may I have another?

I'd say " Pig pile on Bij" but I'm not sure if that expression goes beyond this area.

 

[TheRainMan]

What is a poem? Boy you are clueless. Its the ultimate advocacy. What do you take as a poem? Some empty calorie sugar bar to be consumed and disappear? It exists in a social context where women can be called whores and it's a joke(for you). Why won't you publiclly ask if it's a joke brave man? Poems consist of words which can hurt. People express feelings opinions prejudices with poems. sometimes they call for revolutions.

You maybe the guru of the image you have of the internet. So far it has not been defined by one person - happily not by you.

Hate speech will never be at any forum: "Small potatoes" including your personal attack.

Boy, you are mean with your: "little potatoes" and "ants in my pants" I guess you were describing youself.

okey dokey.

 

[unpredictablebijou]

please sir may I have another?

I'd say " Pig pile on Bij" but I'm not sure if that expression goes beyond this area.

this conversation is moving to the monkey house where it belongs.

join me, ape man?

bj

 

[TheRainMan]

please sir may I have another?

I'd say " Pig pile on Bij" but I'm not sure if that expression goes beyond this area.

this conversation is moving to the monkey house where it belongs.

join me, ape man?

bj

what a zoo.

 

[KOLKORE]

Wow!

kolkore, I've appreciated your willingness to interact and comment before - it's always nice to see people who are willing to really think about the work here. What i'm seeing in this discussion is a question of poetry being considered for its content, rather than its form and style and creativity and those sorts of things, just like in the political poem discussion earlier.

While i believe a poet does of course have a content, an idea in mind, and it is certainly a reader's right to think about that content and whether or not they agree with it or are appealed to by it, i think a reviewer's job is different from a reader's job. A reviewer is more concerned with questions like, "did this poet say what he or she wanted to say effectively?" rather than "do I like what this poet had to say?" In fact, a reviewer who spent too much time on the latter question wouldn't be a fair reviewer. For example, what if a reviewer didn't like the idea of extramarital sex? You'd get reviews that dismissed even the best poetry about sex outside marriage just because of a moral issue. That may, to a certain extent, be within the rights of a reader, but a reviewer just can't do that. It wouldn't be fair to good poets who wrote about controversial things.

As to "hate speech" on boards like this, that's a very, very tricky area. First, there are some differences between something like a racial epithet in a story or poem and someone getting on one of the forums and spewing racial slurs. (It doesn't happen much here in the poetry area, but I find racist and sexist sentiments all over the place in the AH and other spaces). In a poem or story, one must not assume that the author thinks what the characters think. I might write a poem about a racist bastard simply to point out that there are racist bastards in the world and make people consider their feelings about that. But that doesn't make me a racist bastard.

If I get on a forum and spew racist ideas, I hope that Laurel and Manu wouldn't even have to be bothered to step in - this community would jump on that, and decide either to ignore me or argue with me. Again, that's not hypothetical; I have seen that very phenomenon here regularly. Not HERE, in the poetry area (I think we're all too old and fat to be really objectionable to anyone) but here on Lit. Ostensibly, communities like this are about free speech, so people have a right to be racist pigs, but the community also has a right to respond to that however it chooses to.

One of the things poets do is explore the impact of words on an audience. Now, I haven't read the poem in question but I'm going to assume, just for argument, that it's A) really sexist and hateful to women and B) a reasonably "good" poem in the sense that it uses language differently and creatively and says what it intends to say effectively. A reviewer might go so far as to say, okay this piece made me feel icky and I really don't like the person who wrote it. But a reviewer's job is to evaluate on the level of skill, creativity, innovation, stuff like that. Not on content, at least not much. A good reviewer moves beyond personal responses, because it's his or her job to try to tell readers about poems that have a certain quality, regardless of politics or philosophy.

I might suggest (I believe someone pointed this out earlier too) that one thing about "good art" is that it forces people to respond, gets an audience involved. That's not the only criterion for good art but it is an important one. I often say, well, just because I wouldn't want to sit and look at a Kandinsky painting all day doesn't mean he was a bad artist. Picasso's Guernica was angry, strong and offensive to a lot of people, but frankly, that was one of the things that made it good art: it forced a response from the audience. When Courbet painted "L'origine du Monde", ('the origin of the world') which is simply a woman's hips and open genitalia, people found it "obscene" and offensive. When I look at it, especially given the title he gave it, I see something sacred and phenomenally beautiful, treated in a very reverent way. But a reviewer has to look at that (and the reviewers at the time failed this task miserably) and say, does it say what it intended to say? is it a "good painting?" Simplistically, how's his brushwork, his color, his choice of frame? If he had titled it something else, like "Dogs at sunset", it wouldn't be as successful in making a statement about something he believed. That sort of evaluation is within the rights of a reviewer. A reviewer ideally does not say, "I am a gay man who thinks female genitalia is disgusting and therefore this is a Bad Painting."

It's tricky business, this reviewing. You won't see me volunteering to do that job; i don't envy the task. But you, as an audience, have the right to go further than a reviewer, to look at content. Still, content doesn't designate "good" and "bad" art as such. What it determines is the "like" and "don't like" aspects of your response, which are a different set of judgments.

As to the whole question of "whore" and other sexist language, I think you'll find that many of the women here explore those very terms both personally and as writers, because of the strong impact they have. That word particularly is one that I have personally tried to reclaim, much the way the gay community has tried to reclaim the words "queer" and "dyke" and so on. I consider myself a sacred whore, an ethical slut, and that's partly because those terms were so volatile to begin with - they really get misused to apply to women who enjoy sex, or to women who choose to have more than one sex partner. Those of us who fit those categories claim the term in order to re-define those words as positive, and in fact to point up the idea that enjoying sex and having multiple partners is not a bad thing.

again, thanks for being involved enough with the work to form opinions. it makes writers feel like they're actually doing something important.

bijou

And you wrote all this in what.. five ten minutes? wow!
That's a LOT of thought to absorb and respond and I much appreciate both your thoughts and Champagne1982's -regardless of the degree or the areas of agreement. In fact, it's where there is disagreement and a dialog ensues that I find that most learning happens.
The bottom line for me is that It's all in the context. I am keenly aware of the interprative process through which any statement should go through BEFORE assesing it. Clearly, if the context is critical or playful or explorative as you have suggested -I would have never found a reason to making any comment to begin with. But I DID read this poem I did the interpratation (as much as it needed it) and it's the standard spew of token degrading verbiage towards women. The worst part: It IS banal. You may know what else was assessed as banal. And people feel somewhat uncomfortable and don't read it. But why get into trouble the way I do now? Now I have one "guru" pouring verbal potatoes and ants on me, I got Wicked Eve a poet who I truely respect somehow on the other end there too. But the way I was brought up is not to lie to myself. When I feel that I see hate -and it does not matter where, I call it as it is. I feel that I am obliged to do it. Moreover I feel that there is S.t. wrong in pure "aesthesicm". It's a norm not a science BTW, in and of itself. Words in the language are emotionally loaded they are agenda driven and cotext loaded. Not seeing that - is not realizng that you are being manipulated. the view you post is the traditional school of reviewing. I don't know how much you are familiar with deconstruction, but the main claim is that you can't take the full awareness of both the reader and the author at a certain time period out of the equation of the interpratation. In a way at each period we read a different "Hamlet". For me -as a son of holocaust survivors to read banal cliche' and degrading expletives against a group of people, and seeing that it gets a nod "because it's a poem" (without even reading and checking the tone in which its said) is a cause for raising a big red flag.

 

[unpredictablebijou]

And you wrote all this in what.. five ten minutes? wow!

o no. i have a wounded finger and that took a very long time. but it was worth it.

 

[ghost_girl]

I have freshly made banana bread no poetry attached, if ya'll wanna come visit

 

[TheRainMan]

I have freshly made banana bread no poetry attached, if ya'll wanna come visit

i want a big slice.

 

[WickedEve]

I have freshly made banana bread no poetry attached, if ya'll wanna come visit

Would you be offended if I called you a beautiful, banana bread baking whore? I love banana bread.

 

[ghost_girl]

Would you be offended if I called you a beautiful, banana bread baking whore? I love banana bread.

Any other time, that would offend me, if said by anyone else that didn't know me, but well, it's you. The creator of some of my most favorite poems EVER, and I know you mean it in a nice way, lol. Is my room ready yet?


Today, I wish I could be called a whore. Hubby is out of town working and I wasn't needed for that job, and I am so friggin tired of being alone with my cats. I am waiting on a shipment of jute rope so I can macrame some plant hangers for Christmas gifts, and a wall hanging I designed 20 years ago. Jeez, I really put that off a long time, didn't I?

YOU can call me whatever you want, but just you, no one else,

 

[champagne1982]

The bottom line for me is that It's all in the context. I am keenly aware of the interprative process through which any statement should go through BEFORE assesing it. Clearly, if the context is critical or playful or explorative as you have suggested -I would have never found a reason to making any comment to begin with. But I DID read this poem I did the interpratation (as much as it needed it) and it's the standard spew of token degrading verbiage towards women.

You haven't substantiated why you think the poem is spew. Is it the words used or the way you interpreted those words? So, you can confirm or deny the following: contextually, you think that those words shouldn't have been used in the poem.

What if all of the women around this poet called themselves whore or slut? What "frame of reference" are you judging him from? I would venture to say from a different vantage than the poet's. They are words and as such they only have the power we as a reader grant them. Don't make it an over-the-top problem and it won't become one on its own.

p.s. Literotica Guru is not a title TRM claimed for himself... make enough posts and you'll be one too. Virgin, Experienced and Guru are playful titles that the owners of the website chose to illustrate the person's use of the literotica VBb pages. Let's keep it fun. There's enough bullshit in the world, that everything doesn't always need a coating of it.

 

[ghost_girl]

i want a big slice.

They are mini-loaves, you can have a whole one all for yourself.

 

[LeBroz]

I saw you flitting about on the public comments section of the new poems GG so, I figured I'd wait and see if you wrote them up.

I agree with all you say.

Sadly, there are no new poems for today, Friday the 5th of October. I'm suspecting that whoever takes on Sunday will have a load.

Amen to that. Eve must've been AWOL yesterday & missed the goodies.

BTW, there're 6 new postings up today — they come and go ... catch 'em if you can.

.
.

 

[WickedEve]

Amen to that. Eve must've been AWOL yesterday & missed the goodies.

BTW, there're 6 new postings up today — they come and go ... catch 'em if you can.

.
.

Why doesn't someone remind me??!! I'm sure I've told you people before that I have a bad memory. Well, darn. I better go read the thursday poems.

 

[WickedEve]

Any other time, that would offend me, if said by anyone else that didn't know me, but well, it's you. The creator of some of my most favorite poems EVER, and I know you mean it in a nice way, lol. Is my room ready yet?


Today, I wish I could be called a whore. Hubby is out of town working and I wasn't needed for that job, and I am so friggin tired of being alone with my cats. I am waiting on a shipment of jute rope so I can macrame some plant hangers for Christmas gifts, and a wall hanging I designed 20 years ago. Jeez, I really put that off a long time, didn't I?

YOU can call me whatever you want, but just you, no one else,

20 years? LOL I thought I was bad.

 

[ghost_girl]

20 years? LOL I thought I was bad.

well, eve, actually it is more like 25 years. When I first began "knotting" I really got into it, loved the feel of jute against my fingers.

I only stopped because back in the early 80's there was some type of embargo against countries where jute is imported from and it was practically impossible to find. And I don't know if you do any knotting, but jute is the best material to use, nylon is flimsy and I hate the way it feels and items made with it look so cheap, and cotton just seem to decay too fast. I couldnt have jute rope, so I just stopped knotting.

When hubby went out of town working this time, I got really bored and looked for some jute suppliers on the internet and found a plenty, lol. and you can buy it by the yards and yard and yards, really cheap, in all sizes of thickness, so I am going nuts waiting on the UPS guy.

 

[KOLKORE]

Did you read that poem?

You haven't substantiated why you think the poem is spew. Is it the words used or the way you interpreted those words? So, you can confirm or deny the following: contextually, you think that those words shouldn't have been used in the poem.

What if all of the women around this poet called themselves whore or slut? What "frame of reference" are you judging him from? I would venture to say from a different vantage than the poet's. They are words and as such they only have the power we as a reader grant them. Don't make it an over-the-top problem and it won't become one on its own.

I respect your views. Thats why I find it difficult to decide if what you said is serious or not. Have you read that poem before you wrote your comments? I'll assume that you have and respond.

1. There is NOTHING in the poem that suggests a 'real' whore. 2. There is nothing in the poem which suggests a woman calling herself a whore (?) other then the “titles” provided by the guy in the poem.
3. The guy in the poem talks to a woman with whom he has an ongoing relations and a child whom he loves, no mention of pimp /whore relations.
4. Given the level of detail to every day activities and the concrete descriptions there is nothing to suggest that indeed there is a reference to a true whore.
5. Further, a professional whore would not call this guy and ASK FOR MONEY for this guy’s child’s dental treatment (which he refuses).
6. Further, this model guy does not doubt his paternity.
7. Please look at the other poem by the same person. It is also populated by the same female labels Its called SIGNATURE STYLE, not concrete references.

I am sorry if I disrupt the party, but my life experience shows that words have power and even if people pretend that they don’t hear them or ignore them they are still eroding. Therefore, I submit that the suggestion that it is me who gives these words the power etc. is wrong. Look around you. Ask women around how they feel when they are called this way (not in a playful way or in a role play). I see too many occasions when hurting other people (it’s always others) is considered to be 'just fun'. The way I was brought up I learned that when people are anesthetized to the point where degrading other groups of people is considered fun it’s the point where fascism is in the door.

 

[KOLKORE]

You haven't substantiated why you think the poem p.s. Literotica Guru is not a title TRM claimed for himself... make enough posts and you'll be one too. Virgin, Experienced and Guru are playful titles that the owners of the website chose to illustrate the person's use of the literotica VBb pages. Let's keep it fun. There's enough bullshit in the world, that everything doesn't always need a coating of it.

Thanks for the intro on the lingo. Regardless, no title, humorous or otherwise, gives anyone special rights to be rude. If I have it right. Mega experience would normally suggest being condusive to having at the least a civil dialog rather then rude ad hominem attack.

On one thing we agree though. I don’t make it a habit to absorb extra coatings of B.S either. Thus my response to the master. You surprise me though. I would have expected from you, with your appeal to good atmosphere etc. that you would have addressed your last sentence to the guru, not to the person who responded.

 

[Paris_Garters]

Thank you, Tathagata, for noticing my poems and for the critique, you have helped me know where to go with the editing. I apologise for not even noticing that they were up and being reviewed. I've mostly watched the author's board and I was expecting that they would take two weeks or so like stories do. I guess, poems take less time to go through. Anyway, thanks for your comments. They are very helpful and encouraging.